Legal Services Bill [Lords]

I believe that scrutiny and debate of the Bill in this House has been exemplary, and I hope that the other place does not interfere in the arrangements on which we have now settled. We have come a long way since that final report from Sir David Clementi in December 2004. Members will recall that he said at the time that the current system of self-regulation by the providers of legal services—along with the handling of complaints against them by themselves and their inability to set up new structures of business—was flawed. He said that reform of the system was long overdue. Well, this is the reform, and if I am at all impatient now it is because of the timetable: it will take up to three years for these provisions to be implemented. The reason we now need independent regulation and an effective system for handling complaints against providers of legal services is that they have shown themselves to be incapable of doing those things for themselves well. They have tolerated poor standards of service, and in some cases self-interest has been placed above the interests of their consumers. That is why we now need to act. I believe that when there is independent regulation and a tough system for complaints, the providers will sharpen up their act and provide better services for consumers. I want to praise the Minister for constantly focusing on the interests of consumers; and, with the Minister, I want to praise the organisation Which?, which collected its evidence in preparation for the Bill's passage very carefully and kept Members very well informed and briefed on the relevant issues. I think that it has done much to ensure that the Bill that is now before us is of good quality. I congratulate Which? on reaching its 50th anniversary, and invite all Members to visit its display in the Upper Waiting Hall this week and obtain their free pens. In my view, alternative business structures are the most exciting element of the reform of legal services. Whether they apply to lawyers providing services in rural areas, providing services in law centres and giving services to communities pro bono or whether they apply to lawyers at the end of the scale—those involved in international mergers and acquisitions—I believe that the edge we already have in terms of the quality of our legal services at their best will serve us well internationally, as well as nationally and in local communities, if the benefits of those alternative structures can be implemented smoothly and ahead of the competition around the world. An excellent Minister has been in charge of the Bill's progress through the House. Even when the leader of my party changed, the Prime Minister of the country changed and many Ministers in many other Departments changed, this Minister stayed with this job. I think that that was absolutely the right decision, not just for consistency—for we were reaching the end of a very complex process—but because of the qualities that she brought to the job. She has been unfailingly considerate throughout, and, as a non-lawyer, has listened to all arguments from all sources. I believe that through the care she has taken to get decisions right, she has managed to reach the right conclusion on each of the crucial issues that have faced us. I congratulate her on her contribution to the process, and wish her well in her future career after the Bill is on the statute book.